↓ Skip to main content

Working Memory and Reinforcement Schedule Jointly Determine Reinforcement Learning in Children: Potential Implications for Behavioral Parent Training

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Working Memory and Reinforcement Schedule Jointly Determine Reinforcement Learning in Children: Potential Implications for Behavioral Parent Training
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00394
Pubmed ID
Authors

Elien Segers, Tom Beckers, Hilde Geurts, Laurence Claes, Marina Danckaerts, Saskia van der Oord

Abstract

Introduction: Behavioral Parent Training (BPT) is often provided for childhood psychiatric disorders. These disorders have been shown to be associated with working memory impairments. BPT is based on operant learning principles, yet how operant principles shape behavior (through the partial reinforcement (PRF) extinction effect, i.e., greater resistance to extinction that is created when behavior is reinforced partially rather than continuously) and the potential role of working memory therein is scarcely studied in children. This study explored the PRF extinction effect and the role of working memory therein using experimental tasks in typically developing children. Methods: Ninety-seven children (age 6-10) completed a working memory task and an operant learning task, in which children acquired a response-sequence rule under either continuous or PRF (120 trials), followed by an extinction phase (80 trials). Data of 88 children were used for analysis. Results: The PRF extinction effect was confirmed: We observed slower acquisition and extinction in the PRF condition as compared to the continuous reinforcement (CRF) condition. Working memory was negatively related to acquisition but not extinction performance. Conclusion: Both reinforcement contingencies and working memory relate to acquisition performance. Potential implications for BPT are that decreasing working memory load may enhance the chance of optimally learning through reinforcement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 10 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 13%
Student > Bachelor 7 11%
Researcher 6 9%
Other 4 6%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 24 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 6%
Neuroscience 4 6%
Sports and Recreations 3 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Other 3 5%
Unknown 26 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 July 2019.
All research outputs
#5,187,150
of 25,080,471 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,355
of 33,875 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#92,564
of 335,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#213
of 565 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,080,471 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,875 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 335,268 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 565 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its contemporaries.